Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 15 Jun 2008 03:08:34 +0200
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To:        RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: md devices mounted with async
Message-ID:  <48546B92.5050906@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080615013158.7dd19cf0@gumby.homeunix.com.>
References:  <20080614224742.17316919@gumby.homeunix.com.>	<48545212.4040006@FreeBSD.org> <20080615013158.7dd19cf0@gumby.homeunix.com.>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RW wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 01:19:46 +0200
> Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
>> RW wrote:
>>> mdmfs(8) has an example of a malloc-backed md device mounted with
>>> the async option. Is there any point in doing this with malloc and
>>> vnode devices? In neither case does a write to the file-system
>>> require a write to a physical disk.
>> Well, for vnode devices it does write to the disk, 
> 
> I meant that a write to the filesystem doesn't require a corresponding
> write to disk, and the change can stay in memory indefinitely.
> Presumably, more or less, the same inactive pages get written-out to
> swap, with or without async.  

Well, it doesn't necessarily cause a write to disk for each filesystem 
write, but the synchronization mode of the filesystem to the backing 
store is precisely what the async/noasync/sync mount options control!

>> but that isn't the 
>> point; in both cases you are writing to the filesystem that is
>> mounted on top of the md, so that will be faster if it is mounted
>> async.
> 
> In that case, why doesn't /etc/rc.d/tmp default to mounting its
> swap-backed /tmp with async?

It should.

Kris




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48546B92.5050906>